A.C. No. 11099 - Flores-Salado vs. Villanueva, Jr.

Complainants: Lily Flores-Salado, Minda Flores-Lura, and Fe V. Flores filed a disbarment complaint against Atty. Roman A. Villanueva, Jr.
Allegations:

Falsification of a public document – specifically, an affidavit of waiver/withdrawal related to a realty transaction.
Concealment of his true age in order to secure his appointment as a state prosecutor.

The realty in dispute is located in Nasipit, Agusan del Norte and was originally registered under Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 7919.
An adverse claim was annotated on this TCT based on an assertion by the complainants.
An affidavit of waiver/withdrawal – alleged to have been signed by the complainants – was also annotated on the TCT.
Subsequently, the Register of Deeds cancelled TCT No. 7919 and issued two new titles in the respondent’s name.

The complainants asserted that they did not sign the affidavit despite its annotation.
The respondent denied the charge and maintained that the documentary evidence did not sufficiently prove that he falsified the document.
The inherent presumption of regularity given to notarized documents was noted, emphasizing that to rebut such presumption, clear and convincing evidence is required.

Complainants alleged that the respondent concealed his true age, claiming he was born on June 26, 1936, which would have rendered him ineligible for the position he assumed in 2006.
Evidence presented included a residence certificate, an extrajudicial partition document, a local civil registrar certificate pertaining to his marriage, and affidavits of his siblings.
The respondent, however, produced his birth certificate which indicated a birthdate of November 29, 1943, thereby undermining the complainants’ claim.
The issue of the belated registration of his birth was also raised by the complainants but did not outweigh the prima facie effect of the birth certificate.

The IBP Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) found the respondent liable for gross misconduct linked to the forged affidavit and recommended a suspension from the practice of law for two years.
While the charge regarding misrepresentation of age was dismissed by the commission due to the respondent’s birth certificate prevailing over other evidence, the IBP Board later modified the penalty to a three-year suspension upon reconsideration.
Both the respondent and the complainants sought reconsideration, highlighting differing interpretations of the evidentiary findings and their implications on the respondent’s fitness to practice.

The allegations of document falsification were found to be inadequately proven by the complaint, as the disbarment proceeding is not the proper venue for establishing falsification.
The notarized affidavit of waiver/withdrawal carries the presumption of authenticity and regularity.
The respondent’s birth certificate, being an official document made by the local civil registrar, was given decisive weight in establishing his true age.
The jurisdiction over matters affecting qualifications for governmental service was also questioned, emphasizing that such issues should be resolved by the office that granted the appointment.

Whether or not Atty. Roman A. Villanueva, Jr. should be suspended from the practice of law on account of gross misconduct and gross dishonesty.
Whether disbarment proceedings are the appropriate forum to determine allegations of falsification and forgery, or if these issues should first be established in criminal or civil cases.
Whether the evidence submitted—particularly the notarized affidavit of waiver/withdrawal and birth-related documents—sufficiently proves the respondent’s alleged falsification and misrepresentation of age.